Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Burk v. Barnard

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1809PublishedCited by 7 opinions

LYNCH, for the plaintiff, moved to amend the capias se? respondendum in this cause, which was sued out on the 15th April last, and returnable at this term, and the defendant arrested thereon. The writ was tested by mistake in the year 1808, instead of the year 1809.* He cited Carty v. A.silly ^ as a case in point. ,

1Per curiam

It was decided in the case of Bunn v. Thomas & King, that where a term or more intervenes between the teste and return of a writ, it is a nullity, and that where a writ is void, it cannot be amended. The motion must be denied.

Rule refused.

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Briggs v. SneghanIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Sharman v. HuotMontana Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Dickerson v. Cass County BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
  4. Coda v. ThompsonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Sammis v. WightmanSupreme Court of Florida · 1889

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API